MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6910321997 · doi:10.4224/40002729

B707 lap joint specimen No. 349 - NDI inspections

2003· report· en· W6910321997 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2003
Typereport
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRivetLap jointJoint (building)CorrosionEddy-current testingUltrasonic testingEddy currentNondestructive testing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three lap joint sections taken from a B707 aircraft were initially inspected using x-ray inspection techniques to determine if corrosion pillowing cracks were present. Since numerous pillowing cracks were found in all three lap joints, four other nondestructive inspection (NDI) techniques were used to characterize the damage present in each joint. A visual inspection was first made to assess the damage present on the outer surfaces of each joint (both inboard and outboard skins). The NDI techniques that were used included multi frequency eddy current, pulsed eddy current, ultrasonic (C Scan) and D Sight™ inspections. The level of corrosion and corrosion pillowing that was present in these specimens was sufficient to cause a number of the rivet heads to “fail”. Some of the rivets had been replaced, probably during prior maintenance but had since failed due to the stress caused by the corrosion pillowing. There was also corrosion present on the inboard surface as well as on the stringers. The paint had not been stripped and there were no surface cracks visually apparent. The three specimens were separately inspected and all the results obtained are shown in the figures presented below. The eddy current inspections were carried out using four different frequencies 1.1 kHz, 2.4 kHz, 4.3 kHz and 9.6 kHz. Ultrasonic inspection was performed at a frequency of 15 MHz. The X-ray inspection displayed several cracks around the majority of the rivets. High beam energy levels were required to detect pillowing cracks in the intact joint and resulted in extremely dark images thus only one X-ray image, from 349B, is shown in this report. From all of the x-ray inspections the areas indicated to have significant pillowing cracks are noted on the schematic of each specimen.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARC→French-language works237,207→